No more spins in 150/152

you've got 100 hrs or a year to comply.

I havent looked at the AD really closely but what hardware has to be replaced? the rudder bumpers and the stop bolts? Those are really simple pieces, I can't understand why it taked 500 bucks to replace them. drill out 4 rivets, put piece of metal the size of my thumbnail back in place. rivet it in. remove old bolt, insert new bolt. what am i missing?
 
An AD on a 40 year old aircraft design? One of the most common trainers in the USA? What are these guys at the FAA smoking?
 
tonycondon said:
you've got 100 hrs or a year to comply.

I havent looked at the AD really closely but what hardware has to be replaced? the rudder bumpers and the stop bolts? Those are really simple pieces, I can't understand why it taked 500 bucks to replace them. drill out 4 rivets, put piece of metal the size of my thumbnail back in place. rivet it in. remove old bolt, insert new bolt. what am i missing?
Click to expand...


I called Cessna a few years ago to get a "data plate " replacement for the tail when I first purcased my 150M.....they said thatl be something like $400+..for a stupid piece of metal.
I also am curious about the $500 unless there is some special part/kit you must buy from Cessna..but being that this AD is based on 2 accidents in unairworthy aircraft this is a real nuisance of an AD
 
Last edited:
the AD estimates 4 hours of labor to drill out and replace 4 rivets, replace two bolts, and do some safety wire. I'd like to see the job done and see how long it really takes.
 
This isn't a new issue. I've heard about this happening before and thought a similar AD was already out. I'm sure many flight schools have complied or will comply with replacing the parts considering the majority of them do spin training in those aircraft. I also think it would be a bad idea not to just because every student should see a spin at least once and aerobatic aircraft are far and few between if not expensive. IIRC cherokees can't spin at all.
 
Last edited:
Tristar said:
This isn't a new issue. I've heard about this happening before and thought a similar AD was already out. I'm sure many flight schools have complied or will comply with replacing the parts considering the majority of them do spin training in those aircraft. I also think it would be a bad idea not to just because every student should see a spin at least once and aerobatic aircraft are far and few between if not expensive. IIRC cherokees can't spin at all.
Click to expand...

There was an earlier AD. Might have been a Canadian-only AD but I can't put my finger on it at the moment. We did the two 150s we had at the time the SB came out (2001) and they kit took maybe an hour, at the outside, to install. An airplane with the forged bulkheads would be more work.

Anyone who thinks it's a total waste of time should go look at the setup Cessna has on these stops. The original stop has a small lip on its aft end that can, if the rudder is hammered over hard enough, jump over the stop bolt's head and jam the thing. If the hinges are worn it happens more easily, but even if they're relatively tight the whole assembly could conceivably flex enough to do it, since the bellcrank (with its stops) is well below the bottom hinge.

We did them because we spun those airplanes all the time. Still do, in the 172s, but they don't spin nearly as nicely. We let the 150s go because of their lousy high-DA performance and poor exhaust valve life in the O-200s. Besides, young students these days are way taller than we were at that age and some of them just couldn't get into these things without having their kneecaps up their nostrils.

Dan
 
Last edited:
jesse said:
Damn it...Soooo.....are you going to comply?? *hint* *hint...

Not that I'd dare spin your rental 150 or anything :)

Click to expand...

Ya ..Ill do it in 27 hours at the next 100 hour...3rd on this year already holy crap!
 
Tristar said:
IIRC cherokees can't spin at all.
Click to expand...

Not True!!!

There is a Piper publication specifying the required conditions and providing some additional info on weight and balance that is also good for normal use. B oinfo allows you to use actual front seat fore & aft position for the moment arm instead of just an average value. With a heavy weight in the right seat, this allow taking credit for putting his seat farther aft than the mid position.
 
Dan Thomas said:
There was an earlier AD. Might have been a Canadian-only AD but I can't put my finger on it at the moment. We did the two 150s we had at the time the SB came out (2001) and they kit took maybe an hour, at the outside, to install. An airplane with the forged bulkheads would be more work.
Click to expand...

It was a Canuck AD. See:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/applic...d=&vMode=0&showPdf=False&ovid=CF_CF-2000-20_2

We were ahead of the US on this one.

Here is TC's take on it. Go about a third of the way down the page, to "Jammed rudder"
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/publicatio...ro-issue_25/aviation-numero-issue-25-sec3.asp

A scary paragraph from that publication:

"During a TC maintenance audit of another flight school operator at Saint-Hubert Airport, discrepancies were noted that led to the grounding of several aircraft, including five Cessna 152 aircraft with reported rudder overtravelling. The audit revealed that there were scratches or score marks on the five airplanes, indicating that the rudder horns had overtravelled above and beyond the stop bolt at some time."

Dan
 
jesse said:
Damn it...Soooo.....are you going to comply?? *hint* *hint...

Not that I'd dare spin your rental 150 or anything :)

Click to expand...

I've read the AD and agree with it even though the two aircraft that suffered failures were not airworthy.
As an aerobatic instructor I've taught spins in 150 and 152 type aircraft for years with no incidents, but I believe the reasoning for the AD was sound.
It was notable in the AD that in addition to the two accident aircraft, it was found that aircraft meeting current airworthiness inspection criteria could exhibit excess travel past the rudder stops under specific conditions.
Add this to the increasing age of the 150 152 fleet and in my opinion the AD was warranted.
All considered, the individual cost of compliance as compared to the elimination of the issue is comparatively low for an AD.
Dudley Henriques
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top